* This is from the federal criminal complaint against state Rep. Derrick Smith (D-Chicago). It’s taken from footnote 1 on page 3 of FBI Special Agent Bryan Butler’s affidavit. “CS-1″ is the government mole who helped the feds nail Smith. CS-1 has apparently been helping the G for years…

CS-1 has one prior arrest for domestic assault, but no convictions. Over the past 3-4 years, CS-1 has received approximately $1,200 from the FBI for his/her assistance in other investigations. In connection with this investigation, to date, FBI has paid CS-1 $4,000. The government has also provided CS-1 with financial assistance for purposes of relocation.

Um. Wow.

I think anyone close to the 27th Ward Democratic Organization ought to have reason to be very concerned.

===The government has also provided CS-1 with financial assistance for purposes of relocation.===

“Call a MANDATORY meeting of everyone in the Organization, no exceptions … and take precise attendace.”

I do not even want to speculate who should be nervous … but there is a reason you don’t bring guys like Rep. Smith into “your house”, becaue all you need is one the “G” knows they can get, to warm up the bus …

Right on, Rich. Democrats have to handle the Rep. Smith thing very carefully. In addition to CS-1, has Rep. Smith been around long enough to have discovered some more skeletons. If so, they have to find a way to ensure the he doesn’t turn.

Take it a step further, if you are a member of the HGOP Caucus … Cross dings Smith on being indicted, but fails to ding him on the EXACT thing Smith did, and then Cross “takes the lead” which, in theory if Smith is not fighting the allegations, goes specifically public on the actions of enforcing Rule 91!

The HGOP Caucus needs to look themselves in the mirror …

To the Post,

- shore - , Wether you think or “know” you are 100% clean, you have to act to protect yourself from OTHERS, looking for a seat on the Fed Bus. The self-preservation is real, regardless if you know you are “clean”.

You know, this case could wind up like the former Rep/Alderman Ray Frias case. Fria was acquitted in essence because the jury felt that there was too aggressive of an attempt to get him to take a payoff.

Rich’s post raises even more concerns about the judgment and ethics of the federal prosecutor’s office.

As I’ve said before, the canon of ethics of the U.S. Attorney’s Office is designed to prevent them from interfering in the electoral process.

You don’t announce an indictment of someone who’s about to go before the voters because it doesn’t give them time to clear their name.

The timing of this indictment appears to have been clearly intended to influence the outcome of an election.

Do we have any evidence that Smith accepted bribes from anyone other than a paid government informant — an informant who offered him a bribe, and whose word we’re suppose to accept that the bribe was solicited? Nope.

Would the government’s interests have been better served by approaching Smith after the election with the wiretap and flipping him into an informant? Probably.

Will County’s State’s Attorney was successfully sued for locking an innocent man up and denying him exonerating evidence in order to win an upcoming election.

That prosecutor lost his re-election bid, but it didn’t make his actions any less vile.

If anyone has a credible alternative theory for the announcement of the indictment, I’d love to hear it.

Was anyone honestly worried that Smith was going to follow through on the offered bribe, write a letter, get the daycare its money, and all of that was going to happen so swiftly and irreversibly that the feds had a compelling public interest to step in days before the election?

“Critics assailed the timing of the Kansas City registration fraud indictments as inconsistent with a department [of Justice] policy that discourages bringing indictments close to an election if the cases might influence the outcome.”

Yes, Smith’s case isn’t as cut and dried once you read the criminal complaint. But if you read the criminal complaint, as Rich has, you can see why the 27th Warders are probably afraid to talk about anything these days.

On a completely unrelated note, I seem to recall a Tribune story from a few years ago documenting certain grants associated with a former state senator in the area. The grants went to questionable organizations, and the sponsoring senator was quite a character before he announced he was stepping down, dealing a major blow to the Senate softball team.

YDD, they arrested him two days after he (allegedly) took the bribe. What is the impact on the election process if they intentionally sit on that information until afterwards? There would have been hell to pay. Is it their fault that Smith took the bribe right before the election?

To whom? He can sic the FBI, IRS, DEA, etc., on anyone he wants to, whenever he wants to. He picks and chooses his targets, and brings the full force of the national government against them for whatever reasons move him.

Did you all think Chris Kelly was the biggest tax evader of all time?

Fitz is the federal prosecutor-for-life. Every democracy should have one.

I believe this is why the U.S. Department of Justice has an Office of Professional Responsibility:

“The Office of Professional Responsibility, reporting directly to the Attorney General, is responsible for investigating allegations of misconduct involving Department attorneys that relate to the exercise of their authority to investigate, litigate or provide legal advice”

===I’m beginning to wonder whether this reflects that most of our our politicians are cleaner than many like to think.===

CS-1 has been working with the “G” for “3-4 years” … the Feds usually drop that info to let us know CS-1 is not just a “one-time” helper … we just have zero clue what CS-1 has been doing for “3-4 years” …

If you look around, I think you’ll find plenty of downstate newspapers are “usually kept on a pretty short leash by the Chamber of Commerce/Republican Party” even in “strongly democrat(ic) enclaves.” Tally the downstate editorials quoted in Capitol Fax on state tax/business climate issues for the last two or three months, and you’ll get a pretty representative sample.

YDD: There was an article in the PJS yesterday about Schock that was definitely not kid-gloves. While not indictment-worthy (according to current law), it’s nice to see someone saying something about how he’s conducting his business*.

Wordslinger,
The Feds stopped the Blago case before he actually sold the seat. Who was in on the bidding? Rahm, triple j who else. Yes I know it sounds conspiratorial but Fitzgerald let the other parties involved walk. Blago still appointed whoever he wanted. Those attempting to buy a senate seat allowed to walk away free.

I would think its delusional to think Fitgerald would of let an associate of Obamas get recorded making a deal for the senate seat. The investigation was cut short before the seat was sold. Do the Feds arrest someone for talking about selling drugs or do they wait for the money to exchange hands.

Thanks for providing the link to the indictment. Some other really interesting tidbits in there:

- The meeting in which CS-1 initially offered Rep. Smith the alleged bribe was not recorded. (pg 4)

- According to the indictment, the idea that the payment be in cash was CS-1’s idea (pg 19)

- The $2000 in cash was intended to pay CS-1 for what I presume to be legitimate campaign work (pg 22)

- For reasons no one can explain to me, the subsequent meeting and phone call with CS-1 arranging for and accepting his $2000 were not recorded.

Throughout the indictment, it was pretty clear to me that Smith was actually concerned with whether or not the daycare got its grant, separate and apart from any campaign contribution. He tells them they need additional letters of support, he wants to make sure his grant letter is actually a good one, he explains they’ve got to get their grant application right, that the approval process takes time, that he can’t guarantee them a grant.

Moreover, based on the evidence presented in the indictment, I can’t tell whether Smith is trying to obfuscate the source of the payment because he thinks he’s doing something illegal or he just thinks it looks bad politically.

Federal candidates routinely accept contributions from the children of big donors who have maxed out. Its perfectly legal. For all I know from this indictment, Smith just wanted to make sure that the daycare operator was raising the money for his campaign from a source that wouldn’t be traced back to the letter.

Again, there’s probably a heckuva lot more on tape, and the whole case is tough to judge without cross-examining CS-1.

But if obfuscating the source of your political support is an impeacheable offense, the Illinois General Assembly should be empty.

Yellow Dog Democrat: Please quit painting with a broad brush, as if every downstate county has the same make-up, business community, “Chamber influence”, etc.

Go to Alexander County and tell me about the Republican influence there. How about Pope and Hardin? There are pockets of just about anything you want to find in this state, from “Chamber” influence to UMW influence to government worker union influence to UAW influence, etc.

My experience is that these Chambers are so gun-shy that they rarely exert any influences for fear of turning off customers.